SEPTEMBER    17,   1898 


Gunron  In^rimte 

Bulletin 

.  Fourteenth 

Lectures  by  Annual  Course 


t 

7/3 


<jeorge  Qunton 


Vol.  II 


Published  Saturdays  No.  2 


THIS   WEEK:— 


*'How  Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be 

Qoverned?" 


"If  the  government  of  these  new  possessions  is  formulated  along 
these  lines,  we  may  have  what  we  ought  to  have-the  possibility  of 
rapM  growth  towards  political  freedom  in  each  of  these  groups  of  ^ 
islands  that  they  may  become  self-governing,  as  it  is  to  be  hoped  | 
Itba  will  be  It  tL  stLt.  In  this  way,  and  I  think  m  this  way  only  S 
we  can  live  up  to  the  spirit  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  z'^^/  promote  ^ 
he  growth  of  democratic  institutions,  and  do  it  without  injury  to  \ 
fl  ours^vS  If  ultimately,  with  the  industrial  P-^--  -^^^Xd  ^ 
\  development  which  connection  and  intercourse  with  the  United 
\  Stlte7may  promote,  they  reach  a  point  of  capacity  for  complete  self- 
\  government!  it  ought  to  be  understood  that  they  ^^^^^  ^^-^-^^;^-  ^f, 
I  it  shall  not  require  a  revolution  to  give  them  independence  but  that 
\  thev  shall  have  the  right  of  independence  as  soon  as  the  capacity 
\  for^ull,  responsible  democratic  government  is  clearly  developed. 


New  York 
THE    GUNTON    INSTITUTE 

Union   Square 


$1.00  per  year  5  cts.  per  copy 


GUNTON    INSTITUTE   COUNSELORS 


Hon.  Garkkt  A.  Hubart,  Vice-President, 

Dr.  H.  M.  McCkackex,  Chancellor,  New  York  University, 

Hon.  Thomas  B.  Reed,  Speaker,  House  of  Representatives, 

Rev.  Minot  J.  Savage,  D.  D., 

Mr.  Simeon  B.  Chase,  Treasurer,  King  Philip  Mills, 

Mr.  James  R.  Day,  Chancellor,  Syracuse  University, 

Hon.  Charles  Emory  Smith,  Postmaster-General, 

Dr.  Charles  DeGarmo,  Cornell  University, 

Hon.  Daniel  H.  HAsriNcs,  Governor, 

Mr.  Francis  B.  Tiurhek,   Merchant, 

Mr.  David  L.  Weksier,  ^ilerchant. 

Col.  Theodore  Roosevelt, 

Hon.  George  W.  McBride,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Prof.  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman,  Ph.D.,  Columbia  University', 

Hon.  William  E.  Chandler,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Hon.  Joseph  C.  Hendrix,  Pres't,  National  Union  Bank, 

Mrs.  Mary  A.  Lixermore,  D.D., 

Hon.  Josei'h  H.  Walker,  Member  of  Congress, 

Hon.  Carroll  D.  Wright,  U.  S.  Commissioner  of  Labor, 

Rev.  Charles  H.  Eaton,  D.D., 

Rev.  R.  Heber  Newton,  D.  D., 

Hon.  Edward  a.  ^Moseley,  Sec'y,  Interstate  Commerce  Commn 

Hon.  William  F.  Draper,  U.  S.  Ambassador, 

Mrs.  Rachel  Foster  Avery, 

Hon.  William  L.  Strong,  Merchant, 

Hon.  Julius  C.  Burrows,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Col.  Albert  Clarke,  Sec'y,  Home  ^Market  Club, 

Mr.  Joseph  Willets,  Manufacturer, 

Mr.  Richard  P.  Clarkson,  Editor,  the  State  Register, 

Hon.  Henry  Cabot  Lodge,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Hon.  Cornelius  N.  Bliss,  Sec'y  of  the  Interior, 

Hon.  George  C.  Perkins,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Hon.  Horace  G.  Wadlin,  Chief,  State  Labor  Bureau, 

Hon.  Lyman  J.  Gage,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury, 

Hon.  Joseph  R.  Hawley,  U.  S.  Senator, 

Hon.  Roswell  P.  Flower,  Banker, 

Hon.  Clem  Studebaker,  Manufacturer, 

Hon.  Benjamin  F.  Tracy,  Lawyer, 

Hon.  Levi  P.  Morton,  Banker. 

Hon.  John  Russell  Young,  Librarian  of  Congress, 

Gen.  James  H.  Wilson,  Lawyer, 

Most.  Rev.  John  Ireland,  Archbishop  of  Minnesota, 

RjEY.  Booker  T.  Washington,  Principal  Tuskegee  Institute, 

Hon.  Nathan  Gofk,  United  States  Circuit  Judge, 

Hon.  John  D.  Long,  Secretary  of  the  Navy, 

Hon.  James  A.  Gary, 

Hon.  Redkield  Proctor,  U.  S.  .Senator, 

Hon.  John  M.  Thurston,  U.  S.  Senator, 


Paterson,  X.  J. 
New  York  City 
Portland,  Me. 
New  York  City 
Fall  River,  Mass. 
Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
Washington,  D.  C. 
Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Harrisburg.  Pa. 
New  York  City 
Boston,  Mass. 
New  York  City 
St.  Helens,  Oregon 
New  York  City 
Concord,  N.  H. 
New  York  City 
Melrose,  Mass. 
Worcester,  Mass. 
Washington,  D.  C. 
New  York  Cily 
New  York  City 
. ,  Washington.  D.  C. 
Rome,  Italy- 
Philadelphia,  Pa. 
New  York  City 
Kalamazoo,  Mich. 
Boston,  Mass. 
Trenton,  N.  J. 
Des  Moines,  Iowa 
Nahant,  Mass. 
Washington,  D.  C. 
Oakland,  Cal. 
Boston,  Mass. 
Washington,  D.  C. 
Hartford.  Conn. 
New  York  City 
South  Bend,  Ind. 
New  York  City 
New  York  City 
Washington,  D.  C. 
Wilmington,  Del. 
St.  Paul,  Minn. 
Tuskegee,  Ala. 
Clarksburg,  W.  Va. 
Washington,  D.  C. 
Baltimore,  Md. 
Proctor,  Vt. 
Omaha,  Neb. 


GuNTON  Institute 
Bulletin 


President  Gunton's  second  lec- 
ture in  the  course  of  1898-99  is,  m 
answer  to  the  question:  How 
Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be 
Governed?  as  follows: 


I  remember  in  1866  when  Mr. 
Gladstone  introduced  in  the  House 
of  Commons  what  is  known  as  the 
Second  Reform  Bill,  proposing  to 
extend  the  franchise  in  England 
to  the  laboring  classes,  the  Right 
Honorable    Robert    Lowe,    after- 
wards Viscount  Sherbrooke,  made 
a  speech  of   something  over  two 
hours'  duration,  vigorously  oppos- 
ing the  Reform  Bill  on  the  ground 
that   it   was   taking   the   political 
power  out  of  the  hands  of  the  re- 
sponsible classes  of  the  community 
and  putting  it  into  the  hands  of 
the    ignorant    and    incompetent. 
The  bill  passed,  however,  and  the 


franchise    was    extended    to   the 
working  men,  at  least  in  the  cities 
and  boroughs  of  England.    When 
this    became    a    fact,    Mr.    Lowe 
made  another   speech  which  was 
quite  as  significant  as  the  former 
one.    The  substance  of  this  speech 
was :  You  have  opened  the  flood- 
gates of  democracy ;  you  have  put 
the  political  torch  into  the  hands 
of  the  ignorant  masses;  now  the 
imperative  duty,   as    a   matter  of 
self-preservation,     is    to     educate 
them,  or  they  may  soon  apply  the 
torch  that  will  destroy  your  house. 
This  is  very  much  the  position 
of  the   United    States    to-day    in 
reference    to    the    new    territory 
which   has   just     fallen   into   our 
hands.     There  is  a  sense  in  which 
this  has  been  in  part  involuntary, 
as  a  consequence  of  the  war;  but 
through  whatever  cause,  we  now 
have  Hawaii  and  Porto  Rico,  and 
are     essentially     responsible    for 
Cuba,  and  may  become  responsi- 
ble   for    the     Philippines.       The 
question,    therefore,    of  moment- 


GUXTOX     IXSTITUTF.     BuLLETIX 


ous  import,  not  alone  to  the  peo- 
ple of  these  islands  but  to  our- 
selves and  to  civilization  in  gen- 
eral, is,  how  shall  the  problem  of 
government  for  these  peoples  be 
solved  ? 

We  stand  before  the  world  as 
representing  the  highest  type  of 
democratic  institutions,  with  the 
elective  principle  running  com- 
pletely through  our  whole  fabric 
of  government.  It  is  a  part  of 
the  Monroe  Doctrine,  which  is  the 
declaration  of  national  policy  for 
this  country,  that  we  shall  use  our 
influence  to  prevent  the  introduc- 
tion of  monarchical  institutions 
into  any  part  of  this  hemisphere. 
That  is  to  say,  that  no  people  in 
this  hemisphere  shall  be  compelled 
to  accept  a  monarchical  form  of 
government ;  that  we  will  not 
merely  aid  them  in  resisting  this 
but  we  will  affirmatively  aid,  in 
every  way  possible,  all  the  influ- 
ences which  make  for  rapid  growth 
towards  the  most  complete  free 
democratic  institutions. 

Of  course,  as  a  doctrine  of  po- 
litical philosophy,  this  assumes 
that  the  growth  of  political 
institutions  in  the  various  coun- 
tries of  America  towards  de- 
mocracy shall  be  natural,  shall 
be  the  process  of  evolution  ;  and 
that  all  the  influences  which  stim- 
ulate that  tendency  it  shall  be  oitr 


policy    to    encourage    and    aid    in 
every  way  possible. 

That  is  quite  a  different  thing, 
however,  from  a  sudden  and  com- 
plete change  in  the  whole  tvpe 
and  structure  of  governments 
within  a  few  months.  This  is 
not  evolution,  but  revolution.  In 
the  evolution  of  political  institu- 
tions, safety  consists  in  leaving 
very  mitch  to  formation  by  natural 
forces.  The  interests  of  the  people 
under  normal  progressive  condi- 
tions shape  political  institutions- 
by  the  very  industrial  and  social 
necessity,  but  when  revolution 
arrives,  then  the  greatest  wisdom 
is  required — perhaps  wisdom  that 
has  never  yet  been  quite  adequate 
to  the  occasion.  A  revolution 
always  involves,  as  an  after  con- 
sequence, an  arbitrary  political 
constitution,  because  the  changes 
are  so  sudden,  and  class  interests, 
which  may  have  united  for  the 
piirpose  of  the  revolution,  are 
found  to  be  very  diverse  when 
peaceful  life  is  resumed.  It  is. 
necessary,  therefore,  as  a  result 
of  revolution,  always  to  have  a. 
more  or  less  arbitrary  political  in- 
strument or  constitution,  which 
shall  define  the  rights,  possibilities, 
and  powers,  not  merely  of  the 
people,  but  of  the  government 
itself. 

For  this  reason,  a  government. 


How   Shall  Our  New  Possessioxs  be  Governed? 


-'3 


established  by   revolution  always 
labors  under  great  disadvantages. 
Even  our  own  constitution,  which 
is    undoubtedly     the     best      the 
world   has  yet  evolved,  has  many 
such  disadvantages.      The  forms 
of  federal   election,— for   instance 
the    ironclad   provision  that  each 
state  shall  be  equally  represented 
in    the  Senate,   thus  making  Ne- 
vada with  its  forty-five  thousand 
population  equal  in  the    national 
Senate  to  New  York,— a  provision 
which  involves  a  very  wise  prin- 
ciple,  viz:  representation  of  each 
state  as  a   political  unity  distinct 
from  the  direct  citizenship  repre- 
sentation in  the  House  of   Repre- 
sentatives ;  a  provision  which  was 
wholly  unobjectionable  when  the 
constitution  was  adopted,  but  with 
the  growth  of  our  country  has  now 
produced  the  extreme  anomaly  just 
referred    to.       This    furnishes     a 
tempting  bait  for  political  parties 
to  convert  territories,  regardless  of 
their  industrial  or  political  fitness, 
into  states,  in  order  that  they  may 
add  two  members  of  their  party  to 
the  United  States  Senate.   A  close 
contest  between  political  parties  is 
constantly  leading  to  this  method 
of    gaining   advantage.      It   is  m 
this  way  that  most   of  the  moun- 
tain states,  several  of  which  have 
not  a  population  sufficient  to  en- 
title them  to  a  single  representa- 


tive in  Congress,  were  made  into 
states  and  given  two  Senators  and 
one  Congressman,  solely  through 
the  necessities  of  one  or  the  other 
of  the  political  parties. 

This    has    already    come    very 
near    creating    a   national    crisis. 
The   whole    silver  question,  with 
its  implied    legislative    threat    to 
the  industrial  and  financial  stabil- 
ity of  the  nation,  hinged  on  this 
process.      But    for   the    abnormal 
power  of   these  skeleton  states  in 
the   Senate  that  crisis  would  not 
have  occurred.      I   mention    this, 
which  is  one  of    the    features  of 
our    Constitution    that  will   have 
some  day  to   be  reformed,  as  one 
of  the  disadvantages  which  neces- 
sarily   accompany     arbitrary     or 
written    constitutions   which    are 
formulated    as  a  consequence   of 
sudden  social  and  political  revo- 
lution. 

Our  new  possessions  are  of  this 
character.  With  the  exception, 
of  Hawaii,  they  have  been  under 
the  control  of  the  most  backward 
form  of  monarchy.  They  are 
wholly  unacquainted  with  the  in- 
fluence and  working  of  represen- 
tative institutions.  Industriall7 
they  are  practically  in  the  Middle, 
Ages,  where  the  priest  and  the 
baron  exercised  the  chief  author- 
ity. How  shall  they  be  governed 
by  the  United  States,  then,  is  the 


26 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


question.  As  I  said,  we  are  the 
representatives  of  the  most  com- 
plete type  of  democratic  g-overn- 
ment.  Shall  we  have  two  forms 
of  g-overnment,  or  shall  we  ex- 
tend the  democracy  which  pre- 
vails in  the  United  States  to  these 
new  possessions? 

For  a  long  time  it  was  a  stigma 
on    the  name  and  pretensions  of 
this    republic,— nay,     a    scandal, 
that  the   nation   which  stood  for 
and  proclaimed  to  the  world  the 
very  acme  of  human  freedom  had 
a   great    section    of    its    country 
governed    under    the    system    of 
chattel  slavery,  of  the  most  com- 
plete kind.      Not  until    1865  was 
there  any  real  consistency  in  the 
freedom  pretensions  of  the  United 
States.     If  we  institute  monarchy 
or  political  despotism,  or  military 
rule,    over   the   peoples   of   these 
new    possessions,     then     we    are 
countenancing     the    monarchical 
principle;    then  we  are  adopting 
the  form  of  government  and  polit- 
ical  methods  which    the   Monroe 
Doctrine  declares  it  to  be  a  part 
of  our  mission  and  destiny  to  pre- 
vent from  ever  entering  this  hemi- 
sphere. 

On  the  other  hand,  can  we  es- 
tablish complete  democracy  in 
these  new  territories  ?  Is  that 
proposition  feasible  ?  Are  the 
peoples   of    Hawaii,    Porto  Rico, 


the  Philippine  Islands  and  Cuba 
capable  of  self-government  under 
complete  democratic  freedom  such 
as  prevails  in  the  United  States  ? 
Here   we    come    to  the   practical 
question   which  always  has  to  be 
met  when  a  real  problem  is  to  be 
solved.     Abstract  doctrine  is  one 
thing ;  practical  success  is  another. 
The  truth  of  the  abstract  in  any 
particular     case    really     depends 
upon  its  success   in   practical  ap- 
plication.      The    primary  test   of 
the  fitness  of  political  institutions 
is    their    compatibility    with    the 
character  of  the  people.     We  have 
to  recognize  the  fact  in  this  con- 
nection, as  we  should  in    all  dis- 
cussion   of    public     policy,     that 
political  institutions   are  not  the 
end  but  the  means  of  progressive 
civilization. 

In  reality,  political  institutions 
•are  molded  by  and  for  the  indus- 
trial  needs    and    social    require- 
ments of  the  people.     There  are 
states  of   civilization  where   des- 
potism is  preferable  to  democracy, 
and  there  are  states  where    des- 
potism becomes  intolerable  and  de- 
mocracy inevitable.     The  basis  of 
the  evolution  from  theocracy,  au- 
tocracy and  aristocracy  to  democ- 
racy is  the  industrial  and  social  de- 
velopment of  the  people.     As  the 
people  are  industrially  so  they  will 
be  socially,  and  as  they  are  socially 


How   Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


27 


so  must  they  be  politically.  With  a 
low  state  of  industrial  develop- 
ment, where  poverty,  ignorance 
and  social  simplicity  prevail,  re- 
ligious superstition  and  political 
despotism  are  inevitable ;  because 
under  those  conditions  the  people 
are  not  sufficiently  informed,  they 
are  not  sufficiently  intelligent  nor 
sufficiently  characterful  to  either 
require  or  demand  a  high  type  of 
political  institutions.  Wherever 
laborers  work  for  a  few  cents  a 
day,  religious  freedom  and  polit- 
ical independence  are  practically 
impossible.  Indeed  it  may  almost 
be  taken  as  a  test  or  standard  for 
classification  that  religious  free- 
dom, social  individuality  and  po- 
litical democracy,  or  representa- 
tive government,  are  proportion- 
ate to  the  rate  of  wages  and  stand- 
ard of  living  of  the  masses  in  the 
given  country.  For  instance,  it 
would  be  practically  safe  to  say 
that  wherever  wages  are  below  fif- 
teen cents  a  day  the  religion  will 
be  paganism  and  the  government 
absolute  despotism;  neither  Chris- 
tianity nor  representative  mon- 
archy can  be  sustained  by  the  in- 
telligence and  character  that  can 
live  on  fifteen  cents  a  day.  Where 
wages  are  twenty-five  to  fifty 
cents  a  day  we  may  expect  Chris- 
tianity, but  it  will  be  the  earliest 
and    most    despotic    form,    viz.: 


Greek  or  Roman  Catholic ;  and  in 
government  we  shall  find  the 
most  arbitrary  type  of  monarchy. 
Where  wages  are  from  fifty  cents 
to  a  dollar  or  a  dollar  and  a  half, 
we  may  find  some  degree  of  right 
to  free  religious  opinion,  the  pos- 
sibility of  Protestantism,  and  rep- 
resentative government.  And 
where  the  wages  are  two  dollars 
or  more,  we  may  expect  complete 
freedom  in  religion  and  democ- 
racy in  government. 

This  may  seem  a  materialistic 
way  of  classifying  the  religious 
and  social  institutions  of  the 
human  race,  but  it  is  in  accord- 
ance with  universally  observed 
facts,  and  it  is  because  all  types  of 
freedom,  whether  religious,  social 
or  political,  come  from  the  de- 
mands of  the  people  to  whom  the 
institutions  apply ;  every  conces- 
sion of  religious  freedom,  from 
the  absolute  despotism  of  Con- 
stantine  down,  has  been  a  con- 
cession to  the  growing  demands 
for  the  right  of  individual  opinion 
among  the  people.  This  has  uni- 
versally been  the  outcome  of  more 
prosperous  industrial  conditions 
and  more  highly  diversified  social 
life;  these  things  have  stimulated 
the  growth  of  individual  opinion 
and  the  right  of  individual 
thought. 

The  same  is  true  with  reference 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


to  the  growth  of  political  institu- 
tions. Every  concession,  from 
despotism  down  to  the  Declaration 
of  Independence,  was  made  as  a 
reluctant  yielding  to  the  impera- 
tive, and  even  threatening  de- 
mands of  the  people  for  more 
power  and  representation  in  the 
government.  This  too  has  come 
along  with  the  growing  material 
condition  and  expanding  social 
character  of  the  people.  Had 
democratic  institutions  come  in 
any  other  way,  they  would  have 
come  before  the  people  were  pre- 
pared for  them ;  but  as  it  was  the 
people  were  capable  of  using 
them  for  their  own  political  and 
social  advantage.  The  history  of 
the  last  thousand  years  of  Europe 
has  been  the  history  of  revolution 
and  struggle  for  the  free  institu- 
tions which  now  exist,  the  highest 
type  of  which  is  in  the  United 
States. 

What  has  been  true  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  struggle  for  religious 
and  political  freedom  in  the  evolu- 
tion of  modern  democratic  institu- 
tions is  equally  true  in  the  case  of 
the  people  for  whom  we  have  to 
furnish  a  form  of  government. 
The  people  of  Porto  Rico,  of 
Hawaii,  of  the  Philippine  Islands, 
have  not  evolved  the  conditions 
for  democratic  government.  They 
have  not  gone  through  the  process 


of  industrial  growth,  social  expan- 
sion, and  intelligent  political  ex- 
periments. They  are  practically 
in  the  thirteenth  century ;  they 
are  practically  in  the  twenty-five- 
cent-a-day  civilization,  where  arbi- 
trary Christianity  and  despotic 
government  only  have  been  de- 
veloped. Frankness  demands, 
therefore,  that  we  look  the  prob- 
lem squarely  in  the  face  and  re- 
cognize the  fact  that  these  people 
are  not  fit  for  democracy.  They 
are  no  more  fit  for  democracy  than 
were  the  people  of  England  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  III.,  nor  than 
are  the  people  of  Russia  or  Turkey 
to-day. 

It  has  been  said  that  nothing 
succeeds  like  success,  and  the 
success  of  this  republic  depends 
upon  the  successful  administration 
of  its  political  institutions.  If  we 
fail  to  recognize  the  important 
conditions  necessary  to  free  polit- 
ical institutions,  and  act  upon  the 
mere  sentiment  that  democracy  is 
the  American  idea,  and  is  the 
only  form  of  true  freedom,  and 
that  therefore  whoever  are  under 
American  authority  must  have 
the  full  opportunity  of  absolute 
democratic  institutions,  we  shall 
simply  be  running  to  seed ;  we 
shall  be  resting  upon  the  soap 
bubbles  of  sentiment  instead  of 
upon    the   true   basis   of   historic 


How  Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


induction  and  the  principles  of 
sound  political  science.  It  is  be- 
5^ond  all  question  true  that  democ- 
racy is  the  highest  type  of  polit- 
ical government,  but  it  is  also 
true  that  that  highest  type  is  only 
possible  with  a  people  who  are  in- 
dustrially and  socially  prepared 
for  it.  Under  a  democracy  the 
form  of  government  rests  on  the 
character  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
people.  If  they  are  poor,  weak 
and  ignorant,  the  democracy  will 
be  feeble,  corrupt  and  impotent. 
Pope  expressed  a  good  deal  of 
truth  when  he  said: 

"  For  forms  of  government  let  fools  contest, 
Whate'er  is  best  administered  is  best.'' 

That  government  is  always  best 
for  a  people  which  is  best  adapted 
to  promote  the  opportunities  and 
possibilities  for  their  own  indus- 
trial and  social  development,  at  the 
stage  and  under  the  conditions 
then  existing,  whatever  they  may 
be  at  the  moment. 

It  is  probably  true  that  the  Czar 
is  better  for  Russia  in  its  present  in- 
dustrial state,  than  would  be  a 
monarchy  as  liberal  as  that  of 
England,  and  very  much  better 
than  would  be  a  democracy  like  that 
in  the  United  States.  The  average 
Russian  peasant  is  a  political 
baby.  What  he  needs  is  indus- 
trial opportunity ;  what  he  needs 
is  the  stimulation  that  diversified 


industries  and  more  complex  edu 
cational  and  social  experience: 
can  give.  Out  of  that  will  grov 
a  natural  demand  for  more  free 
dom  in  the  different  lines  o: 
government,  and  social  life.  Th( 
surest  sign  that  the  Russiar 
people  are  not  ready  for  any  con 
siderable  concession  of  politica 
power  is  the  fact  that  they  hav( 
never  asked  for  it;  they  have 
never  indicated  in  any  way  tha- 
they  were  suffering  for  the  warn 
of  it ;  that  they  had  ideas  of  how 
to  use  it ;  that  they  had  interestJ 
to  be  promoted  by  political  powei 
if  they  had  it.  Until  that  time 
comes,  until  the  indication  oi 
political  hunger  shows  itself,  ex- 
pansion of  political  power  mighl 
be  a  dangerous  mistake. 

In  England,  which  represents 
the  highest  freedom  in  monarch- 
ical institutions,  a  Czar  would  be 
utterly  irksome  and  oppressive, — 
nay,  he  would  be  impossible. 
Revolution  would  dispossess  any 
king  or  potentate  who  should  as- 
suriie  to  exercise  despotic  author- 
ity. Why?  Solely  because  the 
development  of  interests,  needs, 
desires  and  ambitions  among  the 
English  people  have  created  in 
them  an  imperative  demand  for 
direct  participation  in  govern- 
ment. There  we  have  a  type  of 
freedom  practically  equal   to  our 


3° 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


own ;  there  we  have  representative 
government,  freedom  of  the  press, 
freedom  of  religion,  freedom  of 
discussion,  manhood  suffrage,  and 
in  fact  all  the  elements  of  repre- 
sentative government  and  demo- 
cratic institutions  under  a  mon- 
archical form,  the  monarchical 
element  being  a  form  only.  The 
peculiar  fact  is  that  the  English 
people  have,  by  their  own  domes- 
tic development,  even  under  mon- 
archy, acquired  about  all  the  rights 
and  privileges  exercised  by  the 
American  citizen.  Why  is  not 
the  monarchy,  then,  intolerable  ? 
Because  it  has  steadily  withdrawn 
itself  from  objectionable  action ; 
it  has  steadily  gravitated  towards 
the  point  of  non-interference, 
political  impotence.  The  reason 
for  this  is  that  the  freedom  of 
England  is  wholly  the  result  of 
evolution  or  slow  growth,  and 
steady,  often  imperceptible,  ex- 
pansion of  human  rights  and 
democratic  action.  It  was  not 
the  result  of  a  revolution,  and 
hence  the  line  of  political  author- 
ity in  England,  dating  back  into 
the  Dark  Ages,  has  been  practi- 
cally continuous.  Consequently, 
an  arbitrary  or  written  political 
constitution  has  never  been  found 
necessary.  The  English  consti- 
tution is  unwritten  law,  made  up 
of  precedent  and  tradition,  estab- 


lished by  the  steady  experience  of 
the  people. 

There  are  certain  features  of  an 
unwritten  constitution  which  make 
it  even  better  than  the  written, 
because  it  is  less  difficult  to  bring- 
about  a  change.  An  Act  of  Par- 
liament which  decrees  greater 
freedom  for  the  people  in  any  di- 
rection has  all  the  effect  of  a 
change  in  the  constitution,  whereas 
with  a  written  constitution  a  much 
more  formidable  effort  has  to  be 
made,  and  it  is  always  very  diffi- 
cult if  not  practically  impossible 
of  accomplishment;  but  clear  it  is 
that  under  the  traditional  form  of 
monarchical  institutions,  repre- 
sentative government  can  exist 
and  the  maximum  freedom  be  ac- 
quired. 

It  is  not  absolutely  necessary, 
therefore,  in  order  to  guarantee 
freedom  to  the  people  of  the  newly 
acquired  islands  that  they  should 
have  a  form  of  absolute  elective 
democracy.  It  may  be  urged  that 
if  any  other  form  is  given  to  them 
it  is  a  violation  of  the  principles 
of  the  republic.  No,  that  does  not 
follow.  The  principle  of  the  re- 
public is  that  it  stands  for  the 
maximum  amount  of  human  free- 
dom, and  its  duty  so  far  as  it  has 
any  authority  is  to  promote  the 
conditions  which  shall  furnish  the 
maximum    opportunity    for     the 


How  vShall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


31 


maximum  practical  freedom.  This 
would  not  be  produced  by  absolute 
democracy  in  Hawaii,  Porto  Rico, 
the  Philippines,  nor  probably  in 
Cuba. 

Another  proposition  that  wall 
probably  be  suggested  is  that 
they  become  territories ;  that  they 
be  not  admitted  as  states  into  the 
union,  but  be  made  territories 
and  governed  in  the  same  way 
that  our  present  territories  are 
g^ovemed.  There  is  one  fatal  ob- 
jection to  that;  it  is,  the  danger 
that  for  the  political  purposes  al- 
ready referred  to,  an  effort  will 
be  made  to  convert  them  into 
states  without  any  regard  to  their 
industrial  or  political  fitness  to  be 
an  integral  part  of  the  republic. 
As  I  have  said,  we  have  developed 
a  habit  of  making  the  transfor- 
mation of  territories  into  states  a 
means  of  promoting-  the  interests 
of  political  parties.  If  an  emer- 
gency should  arise  in  which  either 
party  could  perpetuate  its  exist- 
ence or  secure  to  itself  an  added 
lease  of  power  by  adding  to  the 
number  of  United  States  Sena- 
tors, there  is  no  reason  to  believe 
that  it  would  scruple  at  convert- 
ing any  one  of  these  new  groups 
into  a  state  for  that  purpose.  I 
have  no  doubt  whatever  that  if 
the  exigencies  of  political  parties 
required  it,  either  party  would  be 


willing  to-morrow  to  convert 
Hawaii  into  a  state  equal  to  New 
York  or  Massachusetts,  regardless 
of  the  fact  that  more  than  half 
her  population  are  below  the  thir- 
teenth century  status  of  civiliza- 
tion. This  danger  is  too  great  to 
permit  the  new  territories  to  be 
put  on  the  basis  of  our  territorial 
government. 

Then  what  form  of  government 
shall  they  have?  They  are  not  fit 
to  have  a  full  democratic  form ;  it 
would  be  wholly  unsafe  to  put 
them  in  the  political  position  of 
our  territories.  How,  then,  shall 
they  be  governed?  What  form  of 
government  is  most  likely  to  se- 
cure protection  to  property  and 
opportunity  for  the  maximum  in- 
dustrial development  and  political 
growth?  In  the  case  of  Cuba  our 
course  is  tolerably  clear.  It  is  to 
permit  the  Cuban  people  to  give 
intelligent  expression  to  their  de- 
sires in  regard  to  their  form  of 
government.  In  the  meantime 
American  authority  should  be  pre- 
served until  the  fullest  opportun- 
ity has  been  given  for  this  ex- 
pression and  institution  of  a  form 
of  government  by  the  Cubans. 
Thus,  as  soon  as  they  have  given 
evidence  of  their  capacity  to  form 
a  government,  and  the  disposition 
of  the  people  to  acquiesce  in  the 
government,      and     the     govern- 


32 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


ment's  power  to  maintain  the 
rio^hts  of  property,  safety  of  indi- 
viduals and  freedom  of  opinion, 
then  the  administration  of  the 
government  should  be  entrusted 
to  the  Cuban  people.  It  may  not 
be  a  pure  democrac}-.  It  may  be 
a  government  based  somewhat  on 
property,  somewhat  on  intelli- 
gence and  somewhat  on  popula- 
tion. The  government  of  Cuba, 
however,  by  our  own  declaration, 
is  bound  to  pass  into  the  hands^  of 
the  Cubans  as  soon  as  these  con- 
ditions are  fulfilled,  which  it  is  to 
be  hoped  will  not  be  long  after  the 
complete  evacuation  of  Cuba  by 
the  Spanish  troops  has  taken 
place.  It  is  not  necessary  and  it 
ought  not  to  be  expected  that  this 
government  will  entirely  with- 
draw its  authority  until  the  ex- 
periment has  gone  along  suffi- 
ciently to  assure  the  civilized 
world  that  at  least  protection  to 
persons  and  property,  civil  and 
religious  liberty,  are  thoroughly 
secured  to  all  classes,  regardless 
of  their  social  condition  or  previous 
attitude  towards  the  government. 
In  the  case  of  Porto  Rico, 
Hawaii  and  the  Philippines,  how- 
ever, the  matter  is  quite  different. 
The  first  two  of  these  have  fallen 
into  our  hands  unconditionally. 
They  are  to  be  governed  by  the 
United  States,  and  if  we  keep  the 


Philippines  the  same  will  be  true 
of  them.  What  form  of  govern- 
ment shall  we  introduce  there  ? 
There  are  many  dangers  to  our 
political  system  involved  in  these 
new  responsibilities.  In  the  first 
place,  we  have  had  practically  no 
experience  in  colonial  government. 
The  nearest  we  came  to  it  was  in 
the  carpet-bag  government  of  the 
vSouth  after  the  war.  Everybody 
knows  what  that  was.  Under  the 
spoils  system,  which  has  become 
an  ingrained  part  of  our  political 
methods  and  political  ideas,  the 
government  of  the  southern  states 
after  the  rebellion  was  regarded 
and  treated  largely  as  opportunity 
for  exploitation  by  political  ap- 
pointees. If  these  new  territo- 
ries are  to  be  governed  in  the 
same  manner,  then  there  is  danger 
that  they  will  not  only  be  treated 
to  corrupt  political  incompetency 
but  that  the  political  corruption 
will  react  on  our  own  political  life. 
It  may  be  asked  if  this  country 
is  not  as  competent  to  govern  col- 
onies as  England.  I  answer,  no. 
England  has  had  centuries  of  ex- 
perience in  governing  colonies. 
It  has  become  a  traditional  part 
of  her  political  life.  We  have  had 
none.  In  England,  diplomacy  of 
which  colonial  government  is  a 
part  is  reduced  almost  to  a 
science.     Men   are  trained  in  the 


How   Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


33 


service  and  kept  in  the  ser- 
vice, with  as  much  independence 
and  security  of  permanence  in 
the  service  and  freedom  from 
mere  party  politics  as  are  the  offi- 
cers of  our  navy,  and  consequent- 
ly what  is  termed  the  "merit 
system "  has  arisen,  through  a 
normal  course  of  evolution.  It  is 
not  a  matter  of  four  j^ears'  ap- 
pointment, during  a  political  ad- 
ministration, with  the  opportunity 
of  an  appointee  to  make  as  much 
wealth  as  possible  out  of  it  during 
his  term ;  but  it  is  a  systematic 
part  of  the  government  which  is 
practically  removed  from  the 
sphere  of  spoils  politics.  With  us 
the  thing  is  entirely  different. 
All  appointments  would  be  for 
the  brief  term  of  four  years, 
with  the  expectation  that  at 
the  end  of  the  four  years  no 
amount  of  merit  or  efficiency 
would  keep  them  in  their  position, 
and  hence  each  colonial  govern- 
ment, with  the  whole  network  of 
underlings,  would  be  a  field  for 
political  patronage.  This  addi- 
tional patronage  would  necessarily 
react  upon  our  domestic  politics. 
It  would  become  a  part  of  the 
grand  grab  of  a  presidential  elec- 
tion ;  the  rewards  for  the  workers 
and  the  opportunities  for  demand- 
ing office  would  be  vastly  multi- 
plied, so  that  every  heeler  would 


have  the  right  to  demand  the  re- 
moval of  somebody,  if  not  at 
home,  in  some  of  our  foreign  de- 
pendencies. This  is  a  part  of  the 
results  of  the  traditional  methods 
by  which  politics  have  been  con- 
ducted in  this  country.  It  is  no- 
body's fault  in  particular;  it  does 
not  mean  that  our  public  men  are 
less  honest  and  patriotic  than  the 
public  men  of  England  and  other 
countries;  it  means  only  that  we 
have  grown  up  under  a  different 
method,  have  acquired  different 
political  habits  and  a  different 
type  of  rewards  and  punishments 
for  political  virtues.  But  this 
adds  greatly  to  the  danger  of  ter- 
ritorial government  by  appoint- 
ment  from  Washington. 

Is  there  any  way  by  which 
dangers  of  this  kind  can  be  avoid- 
ed ?  Perhaps  it  is  impossible  for 
the  United  States  to  give  an  ideal 
government  to  these  islands, 
partly  because  of  their  own  unfit- 
ness and  partly  because  of  our 
own  inexperience,  but  we  must 
endeavor  to  minimize  the  dangers 
of  spoils  politics  and  maximize 
the  possibilities  of  freedom  and 
growth  towards  self-government 
among  the  peoples  over  whom  we 
are  to  exercise  this  new  authority. 

I  shall  not  pretend  to  draw  up 
a  code  or  constitution  for  the 
government  of  these  new  posses- 


34 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


sions,  but  it  would  seem  that  the 
best  results  to  the  people  and  to 
ourselves  will  be  found  in  the 
direction  of  giving  the  people  as 
much  self-government  as  possible 
and  the  American  government  as 
little  appointing  responsibility  as 
possible.  This,  of  course,  can 
only  be  accomplished  by  a  careful 
examination  of  the  desires  and 
interests  of  the  responsible  people 
in  these  islands.  It  is  more  than 
probable  that  the  principle  of 
restricted  franchise  would  be  most 
workable  and  produce  the  best 
effects.  Of  course,  no  non- 
representative  form  of  govern- 
ment is  to  be  thought  of.  The 
parliamentary  system  must  be 
introduced.  Under  no  other  con- 
ditions can  natural  expansion  and 
political  progress  be  expected. 
Municipal  government  should  be 
left  entirely  to  the  people  them- 
selves, and  some  system  should 
be  devised  for  the  general  govern- 
ment by  which  the  people,  on 
some  responsible  basis  of  prop- 
erty and  intelligence,  can  be 
represented  in  the  legislative 
departments.  The  governor  or 
president,  as  the  case  may  be, 
would  probably  have  to  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  United  States,  but 
he  should  have  the  minimum  ap- 
pointing power  in  the  government 
over  which  he  presides.     A  veto- 


ing power,  with  complete  charge 
of  the  army  and  navy,  should  be 
the  limit  of  his  authority.  Of 
course  it  may  be  advisable  that 
the  United  States  government 
have  some  final  vetoing  power  in 
certain  cases,  but  the  constitution 
should  be  as  elastic  as  possible,  so 
that  the  interest  and  voice  of  the 
people  of  the  islands  should  be  as 
completely  expressed  as  possible 
in  all  the  laws  under  which  they 
have  to  live;  but  above  all,  the 
Washington  government  should 
not  have  the  power  of  filling  sub- 
ordinate offices  by  appointment. 
In  other  words,  the  form  of  gov- 
ernment should  be  made  to  de- 
velop and  secure  the  educational 
opportunities  of  the  people  and 
entire  freedom  of  religious  opin- 
ion. Of  course,  foreign  and  in- 
ternational trade  relations  would 
be  subject  to  the  decision  of  the 
United  States. 

If  the  government  of  these  new 
possessions  is  formulated  along 
these  lines,  we  may  have  what  we 
ought  to  have — the  possibility  of 
rapid  growth  towards  political 
freedom  in  each  of  these  groups 
of  islands,  that  they  may  become 
self-governing,  as  it  is  to  be  hoped 
Cuba  will  be  at  the  start.  la 
this  way,  and  I  think  in  this  way 
only,  we  can  live  up  to  the  spirit 
of  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  vis:  pro- 


How  Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


35 


■mote  the  growth  of  democratic 
institutions,  and  do  it  without  in- 
jury to  ourselves.  If  ultimately, 
with  the  industrial  progress  and 
social  development  which  connec- 
tion and  intercourse  with  the 
United  States  may  promote,  they 
reach  a  point  for  capacity  of  com- 
plete self-government,  it  ought  to 
be  understood  that  they  shall  have 
it^that  it  shall  not  require  a  re- 
volution to  give  them  independ- 
ence but  that  they  shall  have  the 
right  of  independence  as  soon  as 
the  capacity  for  full,  responsible 
democratic  government  is  clearly 
developed. 

If  under  such  freedom  and  more 
perfected  political  institutions 
these  communities  desire  to  be- 
come an  integral  part  of  the 
United  States,  if  they  want  an- 
nexation, if  their  industrial  de- 
velopment has  been  such  that  they 
have  got  out  of  the  mediaeval, 
hand-labor  conditions  and  have 
reached  the  plane  of  modem 
methods  and  wage  conditions,  so 
that  their  industrial  quality  will 
harmonize  with  the  industrial 
character  of  the  United  States, 
then  annexation  may  properly  be 
considered.  Then  they  may  be- 
come an  integral  part  of  ihe 
United  States ;  then  the  expansion 
of  the  republic  will  be  a  natural 
expansion,  a  natural  growth ;  then 


the  opportunities  of  absorption  or 
integration  of  these  peoples  into 
the  one  great  republic  will  be  di- 
rectly in  line  with  the  steady 
growth  and  march  of  evolutionary 
development.  Such  annexation 
is  in  the  order  of  our  natural  des- 
tiny. It  is  consistent  with  the 
broadest  application  of  the  Monroe 
Doctrine  and  the  sanest  principles 
of  political  science,  viz:  —  the 
natural  integration  of  population 
through  industrial  and  political 
affinity  and  fitness.  When  that 
comes,  annexation  will  be  a  bene- 
fit both  to  the  annexed  territory 
and  to  the  republic  itself;  but 
until  that  time  comes,  every  effort 
at  governing  these  new  possessions 
should  be  directed  towards  the 
growth  of  their  capacity  for  com- 
plete self-government  and  indus- 
trial expansion.  To  promote  this 
end  is  the  duty  of  the  United 
States  in  the  present  emergency. 
The  government  of  these  ter- 
ritories, I  insist,  would  be  almost 
a  crime  had  we  sought  it  by  force, 
but  it  having  fallen  as  an  involun- 
tary duty  upon  us,  in  pursuing 
the  legitimate  duty  of  aiding  a 
struggling  island  in  acquiring 
emancipation  from  a  debasing  and 
demoralizing  despotism ;  it  having 
come,  I  say,  as  an  incident  to  this 
truly  beneficial  and  freedom- 
giving    effort    in    driving   Spain 


36 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


from  this  hemisphere,  we  are 
bound  to  assume  the  responsibil- 
ity. But  in  assuming  the  respon- 
sibility, I  repeat,  it  is  our  solemn 
and  imperative  duty  to  apply  the 
highest  wisdom  of  which  we  are 
capable  to  formulating  political 
institutions,  not  for  the  purpose 
of  giving  political  power  to  Ameri- 
cans over  these  people,  but  to  give 
these  people  the  maximum  power 
of  which  they  are  capable  in 
governing  themselves  and  secur- 
ing the  greatest  possible  oppor- 
tunities, industrial  and  political, 
for  self-development.  Our  policy 
should  lead  as  directly  as  possible 
to  gradual  acquisition  of  more 
power  over  themselves  by  these 
people,  which  shall  ultimate  in 
complete  self-government;  so  that 
their  ultimate  annexation  to  the 
United  States,  if  it  comes,  shall 
be  the  result  of  intelligent,  volun- 
tary political  desire,  with  mutual 
benefit  and  advancement  of  gen- 
eral civilization,  both  by  the  de- 
velopment of  completer  freedom 
at  home  and  the  example  of  suc- 
cessful evolution  towards  true  de- 
mocracy for  the  rest  of  the  world. 

Questions 

Question.  You  seem  to  imply 
that  political  or  military  revolu- 
tions are  always  harmful.  Is  it 
not  a  fact  that   such  revolutions 


merely  represent  a  long  previous 
period  of  evolution,  so  that  the 
final  outbreak  is  merely  the  crack- 
ing of  the  shell,  and  proves  that 
the  people  have  reached  a  posi- 
tion of  fitness  for  the  thing  they 
demand,  as  in  our  own  revolution 
and  that  of  Cuba? 

Answer.  Yes,  revolutions  al- 
ways have  a  harmful  element,  but 
the  aggregate  result  may  not  be 
harmful  as  compared  with  re- 
maining in  the  previous  state.  It 
is  true  that  revolutions  are  the  re- 
sult of  previous  evolution,  or 
growth,  but  the  fact  that  the  op- 
posing power  fails  to  yield  by 
concessions  however  gradual,  but 
resists  until  the  arbitrary  break- 
ing up  of  institutions,  like  the 
overthrow  of  monarchy,  is  re- 
sorted to,  is  the  revolutionary  ele- 
ment and  always  involves  an  ar- 
bitrary rearrangement  of  society. 

Now  what  I  intended  to  im- 
press in  my  remarks  was  that 
this  arbitrary  rearrangement 
involved,  which  you  call  the 
"cracking  of  the  shell,"  is  the 
harmful  part.  It  is  not  quite  like 
the  cracking  of  the  shell.  The 
cracking  of  the  shell  by  the  chick 
is  but  the  derangement  of  the  un- 
important part  of  the  machinery, 
whose  usefulness  has  been  out- 
grown. The  revolution  is  an  up- 
rooting of  the  entire  system  and 


How  Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


37 


establishment  of  new  institutions, 
not  a  modification  of  the  old,  but 
radically  different   from  the   old. 
That  was  true  of  our  Revolution, 
and  hence  we  had  to  construct  a 
written  constitution.  It  is  the  iron- 
clad character  of  this  written  con- 
stitution to  which  I  referred.  Eng- 
land is  a  good  illustration.     The 
shell  has  been  cracked  in  England 
a  great  many  times,  but  the  fabric 
from    the    foundation    was   never 
permanently  revolutionized.      In 
other  words,  it  is   the   difference 
between  reform  and   revolution. 
In  the  case  of  Cuba,  Porto  Rico, 
Hawaii,   and  perhaps  the  Philip- 
pine  Islands,  it  is  revolution.      It 
is  not  the  reform  of  existing  in- 
stitutions, nor  even   their  recon- 
struction, but    the    erection    of    a 
brand  new  form  of  government. 
I  repeat  that  this  element,  which 
revolution  inevitably  makes  nec- 
essary, is  always  a  disadvantage 
because  it  gives  a  non-elastic  ba- 
sis   to    the    political    and    social 
structure. 

Question.  If,  as  you  say,  the 
people  of  the  Philippines  and 
Hawaii  are  not  fit  for  self-govern- 
ment, why  do  you  propose  to 
leave  all  matters  of  municipal 
government,  which  is  the  most 
important  kind  of  government, 
wholly  to  the  people  of  those 
islands,     our     government     only 


to  have  a  remote  vetoing  power  r 
Ansivcr.      Because  in  that  way. 
the    government   will   be   molded 
most   nearly   in    accordance   with 
the    ideas    and    character    of    the- 
people.      From  the  point  of  view 
of   highest    civilization   municipal 
government  is  indeed  important, 
perhaps  the  most  important;  but 
it  does  not  so  directly  affect  the- 
preservation  of   order,   protection 
of  property  and  the  general   sta- 
bility of   political   institutions    as- 
does     the     general     government. 
The   reason    for    suggesting   that, 
our  government  have  only  a  re- 
mote vetoing  power  is  to  preserve- 
the    possibility  of   checking   any- 
thing destructive  to  general  secu- 
rity and  political  order,  and  give 
the  greatest    opportunity  for  the 
people    to    evolve    a    government 
most    in    accord   with    their    own 
state   of   civilization.      I    said   we 
should  insist  that  the  principle  of 
government     be      representative. 
Our    interference    should    be    to- 
maintain  this  element.     But  it  is- 
more     than     probable     that     the 
strong  men  and  business  interests 
under  this  supervision  would  de- 
velop a  restricting  representation 
on   the  basis  of    a  strictly  condi- 
tioned suffrage,  and  so  have  what 
would  be  in  effect  a  government 
by  the  better   class  in   the   com- 
munity. 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


As  I  said,  however,  it  should  be 
insisted  that  liberal  educational 
institutions  be  maintained,  so  as 
to  provide  the  opportunities  of 
social  stimulation  towards  suf- 
frage expansion  and  growth  of 
democratic  methods. 

Question.  If  you  do  not  favor 
giving  more  political  freedom  to 
Russia,  what  would  you  suggest 
as  a  means  of  relieving  the  Russian 
peasants  from  the  crushing  taxa- 
tion and  terrorism  under  which 
they  live? 

Answer.  Russia  is  practically 
in  the  era  of  despotic  paternalism. 
What  I  would  suggest  for  Russia 
would  be  government  aid  to  the 
diversification  of  industries.  The 
crushing  taxation  of  Russia  is  due 
to  her  attempt  to  keep  up  a  inili- 
tary  organization  equal  to  the 
highly  industrialized  countries, 
on  crude,  simple,  primitive  indus- 
tries. The  Russian  government 
could  not  do  better  than  build 
some  factories  and  some  more 
railroads  or,  if  needs  be,  give 
special  inducements  to  foreign 
capitalists  to  go  and  locate  there. 
There  is  a  stage  of  civilization 
where  paternalism  is  more  effec- 
tive than  individuali«uu,  inexactly 
the  same  way  that  nnder  certain 
•conditions  monarchy  and  aristoc- 
racy furnish  a  better  government 
than  democracy.     Russia  is  in  the 


era,  as  I  said,  of  industrial  pater- 
nalism, and  the  highest  states- 
manship of  Russia  to-day  would 
be  governmental  initiation  of  di- 
versified industries. 

Question.  You  seem  to  speak 
very  favorably  of  the  idea  that 
when  the  Philippines  and  Hawaii, 
and  Porto  Rico,  have  developed  to 
the  necessary  point  of  fitness,  they 
may  properly  be  annexed  to  the 
United  States.  Is  not  this  in  con- 
tradiction of  all  your  previous 
teaching  that  our  mission  should 
be  confined  entirely  to  the  western 
hemisphere,  and  if  any  annexation 
took  place  in  the  future  it  should 
be  only  of  American  countries, 
leaving  all  other  regions  to  be 
absorbed  in  other  spheres  of  polit- 
ical influence? 

A7iswei-.  I  did  not  intend  to 
give  the  idea  of  favoring  the  an- 
nexation of  the  Philippines  under 
any  conditions.  That  territory 
properly  belongs  to  Asia,  and 
could  never  be  naturally  inte- 
grated with  the  American  repub- 
lic. If  the  accidents  of  fate  force 
the  responsibility  upon  us  of  di- 
recting the  growth  of  political 
freedom  in  the  Philippines,  our 
object  should  be  of  course  to  act 
in  accordance  with  the  natural 
law  of  national  development  and 
the  principles  of  political  science, 
and  promote  the  growth  of  indus- 


How   vShall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


39 


trial  expansion  and  political  free- 
dom in  the  Philippines  in  every 
way  possible ;  but  when  the  Phil- 
ippines have  reached  the  point  of 
fitness  for  complete  self-govern- 
ment and  democratic  institutions 
their  true  function  will  be  to  aid 
in  extending  the  influences  of  in- 
dustrial development  and  politic- 
al freedom  into  Asia,  and  so  be- 
come missionaries,  as  it  were,  of 
a  high  civilization  in  the  Orient; 
and  not  be  segregated  from  the 
East  by  any  political  integra- 
tion with  the  United  States  or 
any  other  western  political  or- 
ganization. 

Question.  Of  course  there  is 
much  truth  in  the  idea  that  an 
unwritten  constitution  permits 
greater  freedom  for  new  action, 
but  on  the  other  hand,  does  not  a 
written  constitution  absolutely 
protect  the  great  fundamental 
rights  of  the  common  people  from 
ever  being  usurped  by  any  special 
interests?  In  other  words,  is  it 
not  more  important  to  guard 
against  encroachments  of  special 
interests,  which  are  always  easy 
in  a  democracy,  than  to  make  the 
road  to  new  movements  so  very 
easy  that  any  kind  of  radical  ex- 
periment could  be  tried  before 
public  opinion  has  a  chance  really 
to  seriously  judge  of  its  merits  ? 

Answer.     Under  a  suddenly  cre- 


ated democracy,  yes ;  but  under  a 
slowly   and    gradually    developed 
type    of    government,    no.      It    is 
the  very  fact  of  freedom  from  the 
restraint  of   tradition  and  custom 
that  makes  the  ironclad  constitu- 
tion  necessary  in  a   suddenly  es- 
tablished   democracy,   as  a  check 
to  inadvisable  legislation.      If  the 
institutions  are  gradtially  evolved, 
modified    and    re-modiiied  in  the 
light  of    and  with    great    respect 
for  the  traditional  customs  of   the 
country, — as  is  the  case  in   Eng- 
land —  sudden    rash    innovations 
become  impossible   from    the  na- 
ture   of    things.       This    rashness 
can  only  come  when   the  anchor- 
age  of    tradition    has   been   des- 
troyed.     It  is  for  that  reason  that 
in    a   newly  established    form    of 
government,  where  previous  tra- 
ditions have  been  swept  away,  a 
definite  written    constitution    be- 
comes    indispensable.       This     is 
pointedly  illustrated  in   the  state 
of    public    opinion    on    finance  in 
this  country.     The  American  peo- 
ple have  absolutely  no  regard   for 
traditional  financial  ideas  and  in- 
stitutions.      No    one    system    of 
banking    and    currency  has   been 
permitted  to  remain  long  enough 
to  establish  what  might  be  called 
a     traditional     respect     for      it. 
Hence,    there    is    nothing    polit- 
ically sacred  about  it.     It  can  be 


4° 


GuNTON    Institute   Bulletin 


handled  as  ruthlessly  and  with  as 
little  regard  as  a  new  rag  doll. 
Tradition  and  social  custom  con- 
stitute the  strongest  of  all  checks 
against  social  and  political  inno- 
vation. Witness  the  effect  of  the 
Chinese  tradition  of  the  sacred- 
ness  of  the  burial  ground.  It  ex- 
ercises such  strong  social  authority 
that  even  the  absolute  despotism 
of  the  Emperor  cannot  disregard 
it.  A  written  constitution  is  like 
every  other  form  of  political  in- 
stitution. It  is  essentially  neces- 
sary under  certain  conditions,  viz: 
in  the  establishment  of  radically 
new  political  institutions.  But 
tinder  conditions  of  traditional 
growth  the  written  constitution  is 
not  only  not  necessary  but  would 
be  a  nuisance. 

Question.  I  understand  you  to 
say  that  the  silver  crisis  in  this 
country  would  not  have  occurred 
except  for  the  large  number  of 
silver  Senators  from  the  small 
mountain  states.  Is  not  this  too 
narrow  a  view  of  the  silver  move- 
ment? It  was  based  on  a  great 
•conviction,  throughout  the  West, 
and  if  its  chief  strength  had  not 
been  shown  in  the  Senate  it  would 
have  taken  form  in  some  other 
way,  as  on  the  popular  vote  for 
Congressman  or  President  for  in- 
stance. 

Ansiver.     No,    I    do   not   think 


that  is  an  especially  narrow  view. 
By  the  silver  crisis,  of  course  I 
meant  the  political  crisis  caused 
by  the  silver  question.  If  there 
had  been  in  the  vSenate  a  strong 
majority  against  the  free  coinage 
of  silver,  as  a  fair  proportional 
representation  of  the  sentiment  of 
the  country  would  have  given,  the 
silver  advocates  would  not  have 
been  so  arrogant  and  threatening 
because  they  would  have  seen  that 
their  cause  could  only  succeed  by 
convincing  the  people  and  chang- 
ing public  opinion  on  the  subject. 
But  when  they  saw  they  could 
"hold  up"  the  Senate,  as  it  were, 
they  became  arrogant  and  dicta- 
torial and  entirely  irrational.  I 
think,  therefore,  it  is  fair  to  say 
that  the  discussion  would  not 
have  reached  the  point  of  threat- 
ening a  political  crisis  but  for  the 
abnormal  senatorial  representa- 
tion from  the  mountain  states. 

Question.  Is  it  entirely  true  to 
say  that  the  truth  of  an  abstract 
rule  depends  on  its  success  in 
practical  application?  For  in- 
stance, is  it  not  an  absolute  truth 
that  democracy  is  the  highest 
type  of  government  yet  devel- 
oped, regardless  of  the  fact  that 
it  might  not  work  in  the  Philip- 
pines? 

Answer.  Yes,  I  think  it  is  essen- 
tially true  to  say  that  the  truth  of 


How  Shall  Our  New  Possessions  be  Governed? 


41 


an   abstract    rule   depends  on   its 
success  in  practice.      There  is  no 
other  test  of  the  truth  of  a  rule  of 
conduct    or    policy.       If   it  won't 
work  in  practice   that  is  the  evi- 
dence that  it  is  not  abstract  truth. 
You  ask  if  it  is  "  not  an  absolute 
truth  that  democracy  is  the  high- 
est  type  of    government  yet    de- 
veloped,   regardless    of    the    fact 
that   it    might   not    work    in    the 
Philippines?"      Whether    or    not 
•democracy    would    work     in     the 
Philippines  is  not  a  full  test,  but 
it   must  work    somewhere.     You 
■cannot  speak  of  democracy  as  ab- 
solutely the  highest  type  of  gov- 
-ernment.      Democracy  is  the  best 
type  of  government  for  the  high- 
•est  yet  developed  people,   but    it 
is  best  because  it  is  most  suitable 
to  their  character  and  higher  de- 
veloped life. 

Form  of  government  is  like  a 
coat.  It  is  not,  absolute  at  all.  Its 
utility  depends  entirely  upon  how 
it  fits  the  wearer.  A  truly  evolved 
and  well-sustained  democracy  is 
a  true  indication  of  the  highest 
type  of  civilized  society  yet  de- 
veloped. But  it  cannot  itself  be 
called  absolutely  the  highest  type 
of  government,  any  more  than 
the  modern  costume  can  be  called 
the  highest  type  of  clothing. 

Question.      You   have   given    a 
strong    and    convincing    arraign 


ment   of    the    spoils    system,   and 
shown  the  dangers  to  come  from 
it  in  governing  new  colonies,  bas- 
ing this  evidently  upon  the  expe- 
rience we  have  had    in    our  own 
country;    yet   I   have  understood 
from  other  lectures  and  writings 
that    you    have    little    sympathy 
with     the     civil     service     reform 
movement,    which   has    so   mate- 
rially improved  our  status  in  this 
respect,   and   will   probably  raise 
our  civil  service  finally  to  as  high 
a  standard  as  the  English,  which 
you  commend  so  strongly. 

Ansivn:      A    suddenly    created 
legalized  civil  service  imposed  by 
legislation  upon  a  people  whose 
traditions  and  customs  are  foreign 
to  it  will  not  work   at  all  like  a 
similar  civil  service  system  which 
has   grown  up   as  a   part  of    the 
traditional  habits  and  methods  of 
the  people.     That   is    the   differ- 
ence  between    the   English   civil 
service  and  the  reformed  Ameri- 
can  civil  service.     It  is  because 
the  English  civil  service  is  a  nat- 
ural  part   of   their   habitual,   po- 
litical thinking  and  breathing,  and 
because  England  has  had  centuries 
of    training    in    colonial    govern- 
ment, that  the  effect  might  natu- 
rally be  expected  to  be  quite  dif- 
ferent under  American  than  un- 
der  English   management.     This 
is  no  particular  criticism  upon  the 


42 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


United  States.  It  is  only  recog- 
nizing a  principle  which  pervades 
all  human  conduct,  viz :  that  peo- 
ple do  well  what  they  have  learned 
to  do  by  the  force  of  habit  and 
custom,  and  the  standard  of  which 
rests  on  long  tradition,  and  they 
do  poorly  that  which  they  do 
without  experience  and  which  is 
contrary  to  their  whole  habit  of 
life  and  principle  of  political 
thought. 

Question.  Your  classification 
of  religions  according  to  in- 
dustrial conditions  seems  to  imply 
that  Christianity,  for  instance, 
has  no  effect  in  stimulating  and 
moulding  the  character  of  poor 
and  ignorant  people  up  to  a  point 
of  fitness  for  that  religion.  The 
work  of  missionaries  in  China  and 
India,  and  of  the  mission  churches 
and  even  the  Salvation  Army  in 
New  York,  London  and  other 
great  cities,  shows  that  a  marked 
general  improvement  is  made  in 
the  condition  of  the  poor  people, 
industrially,  morally  and  every 
way,  by  arousing  their  interest  in 
Christian  ideals  of  character  and 
helpfulness,  and  aiding  them  to 
live  according  to  Christian  prin- 
ciples. 

Ansiver.  I  did  not  intend  to 
imply  that  Christianity  had  no 
stimulating  effect  upon  the  char- 


acter of  poor  and  ignorant  people. 
On  the  contrary,  Christianity  is 
essentially  the  religion  of  a  high- 
er and  more  progressive  civiliza- 
tion than  such  as  has  paganism. 
Its  central  doctrine  implies  human 
equality  and  personal  freedom. 
It  encourages  and  has  always 
been  associated  wnth  the  higher 
phases  of  social  cultivation,  as 
art,  music  and  pure  character. 
But  even  Christianity  makes  very 
much  more  headway  in  highly 
developed  industrial  countries 
than  among  six-cent-a-day  peo- 
ple. Institutions  like  mission 
churches,  Salvation  Armies,  etc., 
are  very  effective  social  instru- 
ments. Through  the  instrumen- 
tality of  Christianity  they  do  in- 
deed take  a  standard  of  higher 
social  ideals  among  classes  of  peo- 
ple that  could  not  otherwise  be 
reached.  Nevertheless,  I  think 
it  is  just  as  true  that  Christianity, 
like  every  other  form  of  high 
human  standards,  succeeds  main- 
ly in  proportion  to  the  industrial 
development  and  social  diversifi- 
cation of  the  people.  In  other 
words,  that  industrial  welfare  and 
social  expansion  furnish  much  the 
more  fertile  soil  for  the  growth 
of  Christianity  or  any  of  the 
higher  social  and  ethical  phases, 
of  human  life. 


Institute  Gossip 


43 


GuNTON    Institute 
Bulletin 

'issued    Weekly,  except  during^  the  holidays  and 
the  summer  racation,  by  the 

GUNTON  INSTITUTE 

47  Union  Square,  Netv  York 
H.   HAYES   ROBBINS.  -  -  Editor 

SepL  17,  1898 


INSTITUTE  GOSSIP 


The  Next  Lecture 

Next  week  President  Gunton 
Avill  lecture  on  ' '  Need  of  Political 
Education,"  and,  inline  with  this, 
the  same  issue  of  the  Bulletin 
will  contain  the  Gunton  Insti- 
tute Prospectus  for  1898-99,  with 
•curriculum  of  studies  for  the 
course  on  Political  Science.  This 
will  be  a  very  important  number 
for  all  our  friends  who  are  inter- 
ested in  local  centers  formed  last 
year  or  to  be  org^anized  this  fall. 
The  lecture  will  point  out  the 
great  need  and  interest  of  just  this 
sort  of  education,  and  the  pro- 
spectus will  show  in  detail  the 
methods  of  the  Institiite  in  sup- 
plying that  need. 

Extra  copies  will  be  forwarded 
to  all  who  would  like  them  for  dis- 
tribution to  persons  who  might  be 
interested  in  this  course,  or  will 
be  mailed  direct  to  lists  of  such 
people,  sent  in  by  our  representa- 
tives or  friends. 


Get  R^ady  Now 
Although  the  lessons  of  the 
present  year's  course  on  political 
science  do  not  begin  until  Octo- 
ber, now  is  the  time  for  the  prelim- 
inary work  of  organizing  local  cen- 
ters and  getting  everything  in  readi- 
ness to  commence  the  work  prompt- 
ly when  the  October  Magazine  is 
received.  The  Institute  officers 
hope  and  expect  that  every  center 
formed  last  year  will  resume  work 
this  fall  with  increased  member- 
ship and  renewed  interest,  and 
that  in  every  locality  where  any 
interest  in  this  work  was  aroused 
last  year  a  determined  effort  will 
now  be  made  to  form  a  center, 
even  though  there  be  not  more 
than  half  a  dozen  members  at  the 
start.  The  Institute  will  aid  its 
representatives  in  every  possible 
way,  and  the  second  j^ear  of  this 
new  plan  of  extending  its  work 
ought  to,  and  we  believe  will, 
show  large  and  significant  re- 
sults. 

Bright  Prospects 
Now  that  good  times  are  at  last 
an  assured  reality,  the  work  of 
enlisting  new  students  and  organ- 
izing local  centers  for  the  study  of 
political  science,  under  the  Gun- 
ton Institute,  ought  to  be  much 
easier  than  it  was  last  year. 
The  expense  is  so  small  and  the 
interest   in    the     work   so    great. 


-44 


GuNTON    Institute    Bulletin 


when  once  it  is  seriously  under- 
taken, that  our  representatives 
oug-ht  to  find  the  coming-  season  a 
genuinely  profitable  one.  Profita- 
ble, we  mean,  too,  in  the  finan- 
cial sense,  because  it  is  the  policy 
of  the  Institute  to  make  as  liberal 
arrangements  as  it  possibly  can 
with  all  persons  who  engage  to 
act  as  its  agents  or  representa- 
tives, either  in  securing  subscrib- 
ers to  the  Magazine,  or  students 
to  the  Institute  courses.  The 
Gunton  Institute  is  not  a  money- 
making  concern;  its  object,  like 
that  of  the  great  universities,  is 
to  carry  on  an  educational  work, 
whose  influence  shall  be  wide- 
spread for  good  throughout  the 
country.  Nevertheless,  it  realizes 
that  those  whose  assistance  it  in- 
vites in  this  work,  must  be  able 
to  secure  from  their  eiforts  a 
proper  return,  and  therefore  is 
willing  to  co-operate  with  them 
on  as  nearly  a  cost  basis  for  itself 
as  possible. 

The  September  Gunton's 
Gtuiton's  for  September  is  con- 
sidered an  unusually  good  num- 
ber. The  two  opening  articles, 
Results  of  the  War  and  The  Out- 
look in  Domestic  Politics  supple- 
ment each  other  very  appropriate- 
ly in  that,  while  the  one  outlines 


the  great  and  enduring  benefits 
to  come  not  only  to  us  and  the 
western  hemisphere,  but  to  the 
whole  world,  from  this  war,  the 
second  discusses  the  grave  prob- 
lems that  come  alongside  with 
these  benefits  and  their  probable 
treatment  when  thrown  into  the 
arena  of  domestic  party  politics. 
Then  there  is  a  very  interesting 
article  on  Opportunities  for  South- 
ern ]Voinen  by  Jerome  Dowd,  Pro- 
fessor of  Sociology  and  Political 
Econoni}^  in  Trinity  College;  a 
brief  but  pointed  contribution 
from  C.  D.  Chamberlin  on  Trusts 
vs.  the  To7un,  answered  in  an  edi- 
torial note  wherein  a  very  sugges- 
tive and  perhaps  unusual  point  of 
view  is  taken  and  abundantly  sup- 
ported by  facts.  A  short  sketch 
is  given  of  the  distinguished  econ- 
omist, Malthus,  whose  portrait 
forms  the  frontispiece;  and  there 
are  strong  articles  on  East  Side 
Living  Conditions  and  Naval  Les- 
sons from  Santiago,  besides  the 
Editorial  Crucible,  Civic  and  Edu- 
cational Notes,  Book  and  Maga- 
zine Reviews,  Science  and  Indus- 
try Notes  and,  last  but  not  least, 
the  Gunton  Institute  Prospectus 
for  1898-99,  with  curriculum  of 
studies  both  for  this  and  for  next 
year.  Price  25  cents,  $2.00  per 
year. 


TlilS  IS  A  PHOTOCOPY  REPRODUCTION 


It  is  made  in  compliance  with  copyright  law 
and  produced  on  acid-free  archival 

book  weight  paper 

which  meets  the  requirements  of 

ANSI/NISO  Z39.48-1992 

Permanence  of  Paper  for  Printed  Library  Materials 


Preservation  photocopying 

by 

The  Uiuversity  of  Connecticut  Libraries 

Preservation  Department 

2001 


y  of  Goryicclicut 
lea 


7  319    ^J"?^ 


University  of 
Connecticut 

Libraries 


39153027628256 


■l 


iiiiiiiiiiii^::  '™ 


limmiummmi 


■ 


mumimmmt. 


